From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Nov 14 01:52:08 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A35C316A4CE for ; Sun, 14 Nov 2004 01:52:08 +0000 (GMT) Received: from out011.verizon.net (out011pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.135]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C8E143D5A for ; Sun, 14 Nov 2004 01:52:08 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from ringworm@inbox.lv) Received: from ringworm.mechee.com ([4.26.226.89]) by out011.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.06.06 201-253-122-130-106-20030910) with ESMTP id <20041114015207.TEBG9299.out011.verizon.net@ringworm.mechee.com> for ; Sat, 13 Nov 2004 19:52:07 -0600 Received: by ringworm.mechee.com (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 1BA472CE786; Sat, 13 Nov 2004 17:50:20 -0800 (PST) From: "Michael C. Shultz" To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 17:50:19 -0800 User-Agent: KMail/1.7.1 References: <20041113101925.GB70256@voodoo.oberon.net> <419655EB.8070506@gmx.net> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200411131750.20211.ringworm@inbox.lv> X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH at out011.verizon.net from [4.26.226.89] at Sat, 13 Nov 2004 19:52:06 -0600 Subject: Re: HEADSUP: INDEX[-5] files were removed from CVS. X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 01:52:08 -0000 On Saturday 13 November 2004 04:05 pm, Matthias Andree wrote: > Michael Nottebrock writes: > > It's unfortunate that the INDEXFILE defaults haven't been changed > > with the removal (it's also unfortunate that portsdb -U breaks if > > INDEXFILE is overriden in make.conf, but that's a portupgrade bug). > > It might take a while until the necessary additional changes have > > been reviewed - perhaps using sysutils/portsnap to update your > > portstree will do as a workaround for the time being (you get > > matching indices for each ports update). > > It's unfortunate that major changes are made without public > consultation and then only halfway. > > "make fetchindex" runs on the order of a minute for my machine (1 > Mbit/s link), but I'm definitely not using "make index" on my > K6-2/300. > > It's about time for a _fast_ index generator, or a cache so that only > changed records are replaced. INDEX has been an annoyance ever since > but no-one has a decent solution how ports can do without. I learned to live without INDEX ages ago but I have an idea on how to easily help others who need it. Why not just make a port of the INDEX file then post a patch everyweek or two to keep it updated? -Mike